[cfp-interest 3410] FW: [SC22WG14.29686] WG14 2025/02 meeting action item: CFP to look at N3447's change 3.2, addition 50'

[RAJAN BHAKTA]

In case people are not on the WG14 reflector.

Regards,

Rajan Bhakta


From: owner-sc22wg14 at open-std.org <owner-sc22wg14 at open-std.org> on behalf of Joseph Myers <josmyers at redhat.com>
Date: Wednesday, March 12, 2025 at 11:40 AM
To: RAJAN BHAKTA <rbhakta at us.ibm.com>
Cc: ISO C <sc22wg14 at open-std.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [SC22WG14.29686] WG14 2025/02 meeting action item: CFP to look at N3447's change 3.2, addition 50'
On Wed, 12 Mar 2025, RAJAN BHAKTA wrote:

> We suggest using the following wording instead:
>
> (50’) A floating expression is evaluated in the translation environment
> with less arithmetic range or precision than if the expression were
> being evaluated in the execution environment.

The effect of that would seem to be that no program can safely use
floating-point expressions in constant expressions at all, in case the
implementation chooses to evaluate with less range or precision and so
give them undefined behavior.

I think we need a demons or ghosts paper to replace this "shall be" (in
6.6.1) by "is" (or some similar change), since if there is UB here, there
should not be; the implementation should not be permitted to use less
range or precision in the translation environment.

--
Joseph S. Myers
josmyers at redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.oakapple.net/pipermail/cfp-interest/attachments/20250312/96e1f2ee/attachment-0001.htm>